I actually think he might decline it. I'm pretty confident he could get about 3 million per on the open market. I hope i'm wrong though, I like having him as a Pacer.

Bball

03-28-2009, 04:53 PM

He has a player option that I expect him to pick up.

I was thinking that too but then the thought hit me that unless he gets a promise of more playing time and a consistent role, he might be fine with declining his option and signing somewhere else for less per year (worst case) but with enough guaranteed years to come out with more overall money and possibly a larger role elsewhere. Or consistent role.

IOW... If he's guaranteed 3 mil for a year, he could sign somewhere else for 2.5mil for 2 guaranteed years and be 2 mil ahead.... and possibly have a more important role on another team. (I don't know if my numbers are accurate/realistic but the point remains the same). A capologist is free to shoot my line of thinking down if they want.

-Bball

Smoothdave1

03-28-2009, 05:52 PM

No way Diener gets 3 million a year on the open market. Jarrett Jack? Yes Travis Diener? No. Teams aren't going to be handing out contracts like they previously did, especially given the reduction in salary cap and economic conditios. Sure, the LeBron's and Kobe's of the world will not be affected, but the 2nd, 3rd and 4th tier free agents will be affected. Diener could get maybe a 3 year/5-6 million dollar deal at most. Guards are a dime a dozen and while he has talent, he'll be a career backup.

Besides, Diener is getting married this summer (his fiancee was at the Bulls game today and shown on TV) and lives in Indy most of the year. My prediction is that Diener exercises his option and stays in Indy next year.

Brad8888

03-28-2009, 06:19 PM

My guess is Diener will be included in a sign and trade as sweetener in a Tinsley deal. I believe he would want the opportunity to actually play meaningful minutes as a backup pg as opposed to being the third option, unless for whatever reason we trade TJ.

Kemo

03-28-2009, 09:31 PM

In all honesty , I'd much rather trade TJ for a tough,defensive-minded PF as a primary backup to Murphy splitting the minutes .. move Foster to the 5 position to share minutes with Hibbert , and move Jack as our primary PG, with Diener sharing the load of minutes at the 1 ..

THAT is what I would ultimately like to see happen...

I would be P*SSED, if we don't try and keep Travis, and give him a little bit bigger role, than that of a 3rd string pg .. He is just too good ..
We have seen flashes of his brilliant on the court play , but the problem is consistancy ... You can't expect a guy to be a consistant scoring threat when he plays so little..
Our offense FLOURISHES when he is on the court setting up the offense..
We DON'T need him to be scoring and driving in the lane a'la TJ all the time, that is what Jack will be for ..when it is called for .. and when it is called for some good 3 point plays... Travis will be there to do the job...

I still don't get this "defensive liability " bullcrap I keep hearing about Travis.. For the most part, he sticks to his man ... UNLIKE TJ, who roams the paint, and has to run out to his OPEN man, who subsequentially hits the shot usually..

To ME, TJ is more of a liability out on the floor than Travis is , with his bonehead plays, turnovers, and his Tinsley-esque ability to take over a game and cause us to lose .. if some of you people can't see that... well then I give up ... you people simply cannot be reached I guess...

Travis is alot better than the majority of you here at PD give him credit for..

I'd take Travis on MY team anyday ... ANYDAY over TJ Ford .. and I actually like TJ.. but NOT over Diener as my "POINT" guard

.
.

Peck

03-28-2009, 10:07 PM

The truth is that as long as O'Brien is the coach and Jarret Jack is on the team team there is no point in having Diener on the team other than to keep a roster spot filled.

Travis is not a bad player, he is not a good player but he is a solid player.

Jack is playing way to many min. and has all season long, the fact that the guy is on the floor for 40 min. a game on a routine basis is beyond ludicras.

Anthem

03-28-2009, 10:33 PM

The truth is that as long as O'Brien is the coach and Jarret Jack is on the team team there is no point in having Diener on the team other than to keep a roster spot filled.
Why?

I'd play Jack and Travis over TJ and Travis.

Peck

03-28-2009, 11:46 PM

Why?

I'd play Jack and Travis over TJ and Travis.

Of course you would, however there is zero reason to play Jack & Travis or Jack & JT for more than a few min. a game.

Jack is being overplayed, period.

He is playing min. on par with what Kobe, LeBron or Dwight would be playing.

Look I really don't dislike Jack at all, in fact I would much rather have him than the other two for the most part. But there is just zero reason that this guy shoul be avg. almost 40 min. a game.

Travis by no means is a great player but I'm not sure that he deserves to have DNP-CD after his name as often as he gets it. Now maybe on a better team with a better group of p.g.'s.

But there is just no way that Jack deserves the min. he is getting.

UncleReg

03-29-2009, 12:07 AM

Look I really don't dislike Jack at all, in fact I would much rather have him than the other two for the most part. But there is just zero reason that this guy shoul be avg. almost 40 min. a game.

Travis by no means is a great player but I'm not sure that he deserves to have DNP-CD after his name as often as he gets it. Now maybe on a better team with a better group of p.g.'s.

But there is just no way that Jack deserves the min. he is getting.

My sentiments exactly! Problem is TJ can't run an offense, so that is why Jack is playing so much. That's why we need to get a guy who can run an offense and facilitate, through the draft, free agency, or a trade.

Roaming Gnome

03-29-2009, 12:38 AM

If Travis stays, then he should prepare to be the 3rd string. He's pretty good as a point guard that you bring off towards the end of your bench, but the more that you expect from him, the more the holes in his game will start to show.

El Pacero

03-29-2009, 05:22 AM

If Travis stays, then he should prepare to be the 3rd string. He's pretty good as a point guard that you bring off towards the end of your bench, but the more that you expect from him, the more the holes in his game will start to show.

I'm not sure what holes you are talking about . . . the ability to drive the ball down the court better than "one of the fastest players in the NBA"...or the ability to hit a three (not this year, but still). . . or his great passing and decisions to keep the offense moving? I see Ford missing nearly half of his fast layups, and I see Deiner playing solid minutes and helping the team. He's like the mini-Foster to me, stuff that is not recorded in the record books. I am a huge Travis fan so I'm a bit tainted.

Justin Tyme

03-29-2009, 11:41 AM

My sentiments exactly! Problem is TJ can't run an offense, so that is why Jack is playing so much. That's why we need to get a guy who can run an offense and facilitate, through the draft, free agency, or a trade.

Jack has been playing so much b/c he's been playing SG so much. I'd like to see a breakdown of his minutes at SG vs PG.

Justin Tyme

03-29-2009, 12:09 PM

With the Diener having a player option for next season, it might best behoove him to stay with the Pacers for the 09-10 season with how the finanical situation is. IIRC, he'll make 1.75 mil(too lazy to look it up) this coming year, so unless he/his agent thinks he can do better PT and money chances are he'll not opt out. Another factor in his decision making is whether the Pacers draft a PG.

When does he have to make an opt out decision for 09-10 season?

I'm a fence rider on Diener and if he stays fine and if he leaves fine. I'm on record hoping the Pacers can trade Ford to improve the team. That puts Jack at starting PG which pretty much means he won't be playing SG next season. That should make the backcourt with Jack and Rush better defensively next year. JMOAA

count55

03-29-2009, 12:27 PM

With the Diener having a player option for next season, it might best behoove him to stay with the Pacers for the 09-10 season with how the finanical situation is. IIRC, he'll make 1.75 mil(too lazy to look it up) this coming year, so unless he/his agent thinks he can do better PT and money chances are he'll not opt out. Another factor in his decision making is whether the Pacers draft a PG.

When does he have to make an opt out decision for 09-10 season?

I'm a fence rider on Diener and if he stays fine and if he leaves fine. I'm on record hoping the Pacers can trade Ford to improve the team. That puts Jack at starting PG which pretty much means he won't be playing SG next season. That should make the backcourt with Jack and Rush better defensively next year. JMOAA

June 30

$1,740 will be his salary next year.

ABADays

03-29-2009, 01:02 PM

If you aren't interested in having a Travis Diener on your team I have to question just what you do want.

BlueNGold

03-29-2009, 05:02 PM

I am no Jack fan, but he should be our starting PG. He is worse than AJ, Tinsley and numerous other starting PG's the Pacers have had over the years, but he's a better starting PG than Diener and TJ.

The problem with TJ is that he not only does not make players around him better, he makes them worse! TJ is probably a good guy to have off the bench for some instant offense...yet he's probably not a better PG than Diener.

Diener is close to being as good as Jack overall, but I like Jack's toughness and believe Jack is better on defense as long as he's not guarding the other team's Center like JOb likes.

What is sad is, all of these guys are really backup PG's. If AJ was on the Pacers, I would start him over any of them.

Edit: As we wallow in last place in our division, I think people forget how much talent this team used to have. When AJ is an upgrade as your starting PG, you are in pretty bad shape. I think Travis Best is better than any of our current PG's too. Actually, he is much like TJ but with more strength and defensive tenacity. I'd take Travis over any of them too.

Peck

03-29-2009, 05:26 PM

Again I want to state I have no real problem with Jack. I certainly don't think he is your long term answer at the p.g. spot, but I actually prefer him to Ford.

However I have a huge significant problem with the fact that he is playing and has played to many min.

Yes, I understand that since Dunleavy has been down he has played a lot of min. at two. But that is the problem, a lot of those min. just over a month ago and going back about another two months were min. that should have gone to Rush. Instead of DNP-CD by Rush's name and 41 min. by Jacks name I would really have loved for it to be more like 20 and 20 each.

There is no law that states that Jack has to be on the floor all of the time, he is NOT that good. He's not bad, but there is just no way in hell that this guy should have been the game for 2,300 min. this season. Even taking away the fact that he has played in every game he is still avg. the third most min. per game at 32.5 only behind Granger and Murphy.

Anthem

03-30-2009, 01:27 AM

Well I'm not going to argue with you there. I'm fine with Rush getting 30mpg as long as they're all at PG.

I strongly dislike going small.

Major Cold

03-30-2009, 11:06 AM

The issue is not a backup or third string PG. Currently we have 3 solid to really good backup PGs. What we need is a lock down defender who can distribute to others. We don't need a slasher only guy. We need a guy who can break down his defender and create openings for Granger, Murphy, and Rush. Diener can do that but not on a fulltime basis, because of his defensive deficiencies.

Justin Tyme

03-30-2009, 02:26 PM

I'm fine with Rush getting 30mpg as long as they're all at PG.

:eek: Really!

Pacers

03-31-2009, 07:53 AM

FWIW, I've heard his house is either up for sale or he is thinking of putting it on the market.

count55

03-31-2009, 08:04 AM

Well I'm not going to argue with you there. I'm fine with Rush getting 30mpg as long as they're all at PG.

I strongly dislike going small.

I'm sure you mean Jack.

I'm ok with going small in the backcourt for brief stints, as long as Rush and Granger are getting minutes.

The only small I don't like is playing Murph at the 5.

Major Cold

03-31-2009, 08:28 AM

Murphy at the 5 is better than Al at the 5 though.

Kemo

03-31-2009, 12:49 PM

FWIW, I've heard his house is either up for sale or he is thinking of putting it on the market.

Please say it ain't so !!!!

.
.

:(:-o:(:cry:

Justin Tyme

03-31-2009, 01:42 PM

Geez, some of you have such a short memory. He WAS the starting PG a % of last season, and he isn't a starting nor a heavy minute PG. He is what he is a 3rd string PG that could play b/u minutes when necessary. Sure his TO to Assist stats are good, but he can't guard his own shadow. All last season the opposing PG's had their way breaking him down and penetrating. He gives the Pacers little if any perimeter "D", or have you forgotten? Sure if he's matched in the backcourt with Rush, Daniels, or such to help offset his lack of "D" he can play some minutes at PG, but match him in the backcourt with Dun and there is no backcourt "D". That was obvious last season.

Whether he stays or goes makes little difference to me, but the realism is he isn't starting PG material or a heavy minutes PG. His shooting is as streaky as bacon grease smeared on a window. Diener is what he is and that's a 3rd PG on most teams and a 2nd PG on a team that doesn't have another PG that's better than him.

He's a 11-15 player like McBob and Graham, nothing more. Quit making players who wear a Pacers uni into more than they are. He's the type player that is a good team mate, doesn't cause problems, and who can fill a need at times when necessary. If he should leave the Pacers and go to another team, he won't be anything different than what he is now. That's not bad, it's just some are making him out to be much much more. JMOAA

Unclebuck

03-31-2009, 01:46 PM

As much as I appreciate Diener as a player - he is simply not starting point guard material and is very miuch borderline second strong material. He is best suited as a third string situational point guard.

Roaming Gnome

03-31-2009, 01:51 PM

Geez, some of you have such a short memory. He WAS the starting PG a % of last season, and he isn't a starting nor a heavy minute PG. He is what he is a 3rd string PG that could play b/u minutes when necessary. Sure his TO to Assist stats are good, but he can't guard his own shadow. All last season the opposing PG's had their way breaking him down and penetrating. He gives the Pacers little if any perimeter "D", or have you forgotten? Sure if he's matched in the backcourt with Rush, Daniels, or such to help offset his lack of "D" he can play some minutes at PG, but match him in the backcourt with Dun and there is no backcourt "D". That was obvious last season.

Whether he stays or goes makes little difference to me, but the realism is he isn't starting PG material or a heavy minutes PG. His shooting is as streaky as bacon grease smeared on a window. Diener is what he is and that's a 3rd PG on most teams and a 2nd PG on a team that doesn't have another PG that's better than him.

He's a 11-15 player like McBob and Graham, nothing more. Quit making players who wear a Pacers uni into more than they are. He's the type player that is a good team mate, doesn't cause problems, and who can fill a need at times when necessary. If he should leave the Pacers and go to another team, he won't be anything different than what he is now. That's not bad, it's just some are making him out to be much much more. JMOAA

I couldn't agree more! If his shooting was as dependable as Jose Berea's of Dallas or the Novak kid with the Clippers...Then he would hold more value to me as a guy that you bring off the bench for "instant offense" but his shooting isn't dependable enough to overlook his total inability on the defensive side of the ball.

Kid Minneapolis

03-31-2009, 02:03 PM

Good God, y'all are all over the map.

Hicks

03-31-2009, 02:13 PM

Diener runs the offense well, pushes the ball up the floor well, and keeps the defense honest at worst with his shooting, torches them at best. His defense is lacking.

I think he's a good backup PG to have around. 2nd or 3rd string.

Kemo

03-31-2009, 03:01 PM

Geez, some of you have such a short memory. He WAS the starting PG a % of last season, and he isn't a starting nor a heavy minute PG. He is what he is a 3rd string PG that could play b/u minutes when necessary. Sure his TO to Assist stats are good, but he can't guard his own shadow. All last season the opposing PG's had their way breaking him down and penetrating. He gives the Pacers little if any perimeter "D", or have you forgotten? Sure if he's matched in the backcourt with Rush, Daniels, or such to help offset his lack of "D" he can play some minutes at PG, but match him in the backcourt with Dun and there is no backcourt "D". That was obvious last season.

Whether he stays or goes makes little difference to me, but the realism is he isn't starting PG material or a heavy minutes PG. His shooting is as streaky as bacon grease smeared on a window. Diener is what he is and that's a 3rd PG on most teams and a 2nd PG on a team that doesn't have another PG that's better than him.

He's a 11-15 player like McBob and Graham, nothing more. Quit making players who wear a Pacers uni into more than they are. He's the type player that is a good team mate, doesn't cause problems, and who can fill a need at times when necessary. If he should leave the Pacers and go to another team, he won't be anything different than what he is now. That's not bad, it's just some are making him out to be much much more. JMOAA

....And just who are YOU to say what Diener can or can't be??

Only Diener can dictate that .. But given that he isn't teacher's pet, getting 20+ mpg , he probably will never get to see his potential realized... just the flashes of brilliance... sad really ..

I'm sorry , but Travis more than handled business for us that end of season.. If you would remember... on a crappy (a 1/4 of the team we are now) , injure laden team with nobody doing anything much but DG and Dun.. .. back when we first got the players in the GS trade and no one knew each other well enough to play much more than a pickup game at Rucker park lol...

It's guys like you , JOB and others who hold back potentially very good players from ever living up to that potential.. in favor of homeboy nepotism...

Same thing with McRoberts... they continue to get the proverbial shaft early in their careers, and it taints them from ever becoming anything more than a 3rd string backup..

It seems no one is willing to give these guys a real chance ..

It's sad that players like Rose, Westbrooke and etc get the world handed to them on a silver platter right from the start , yet others because they weren't the "touted" rookies in the draft , get paid no mind and shuffled to the back of the deck .....

Granted Rose and some of these others ARE ridiculously good , but there seems to be a sense of entitlement in the NBA... Where a high drafted rookie, automatically starts on a mediocre/decent team and gets to become that star without "earning" that starting spot..
It's almost a guarantee..

:(:(:(:rolleyes:

sorry for the rant guys..., it just makes me very mad to see nba careers p*ssed away .. It's kind of like in high school with all the cliques .. either you are in the "in crowd" or you are on the outside looking in ..

Kemo

03-31-2009, 03:05 PM

What don't people realize... that we DON'T NEED OUR PG TO BE A SCORER ?!?!?!?!?!?!!

... and exactly WHAT do you guys expect in the ways of a consistant shot , when he is only used very sparingly ..?

Roaming Gnome

03-31-2009, 03:32 PM

....And just who are YOU to say what Diener can or can't be??

Only Diener can dictate that .. But given that he isn't teacher's pet, getting 20+ mpg , he probably will never get to see his potential realized... just the flashes of brilliance... sad really ..

I'm sorry , but Travis more than handled business for us that end of season.. If you would remember... on a crappy (a 1/4 of the team we are now) , injure laden team with nobody doing anything much but DG and Dun.. .. back when we first got the players in the GS trade and no one knew each other well enough to play much more than a pickup game at Rucker park lol...

It's guys like you , JOB and others who hold back potentially very good players from ever living up to that potential.. in favor of homeboy nepotism...

Same thing with McRoberts... they continue to get the proverbial shaft early in their careers, and it taints them from ever becoming anything more than a 3rd string backup..

It seems no one is willing to give these guys a real chance ..

It's sad that players like Rose, Westbrooke and etc get the world handed to them on a silver platter right from the start , yet others because they weren't the "touted" rookies in the draft , get paid no mind and shuffled to the back of the deck .....

Granted Rose and some of these others ARE ridiculously good , but there seems to be a sense of entitlement in the NBA... Where a high drafted rookie, automatically starts on a mediocre/decent team and gets to become that star without "earning" that starting spot..
It's almost a guarantee..

:(:(:(:rolleyes:

sorry for the rant guys..., it just makes me very mad to see nba careers p*ssed away .. It's kind of like in high school with all the cliques .. either you are in the "in crowd" or you are on the outside looking in ..

What do you say about guys that were drafted in positions in the second round or late first round that did make it? Guys like Rajon Rondo, Tony Parker, Gilbert Arenas were not "top of the draft" guys, but they are making their mark on the NBA. There are many others that fall in this area to just let this go:
yet others because they weren't the "touted" rookies in the draft , get paid no mind and shuffled to the back of the deck"

Unclebuck

03-31-2009, 03:49 PM

My biggest fault with Travis isn't even his defense. Is that in the halfcourt he cannot create offense. Unless you have a Kobe, Wade, Lebron, maybe even Pierce - someone at the small forward/shooting guard that can create a shot, then you need a point giuard to do it and as good as Diener is as running the fastbreak and moving the ball on offense, there are times in the halfcourt when the defense is locked in that you need your point guard to create something out of nothing and Diener isn't close to being able to do this. Ford and Jack are much more able to do that.

If you go back and look at some of the best/better point guards in the history of the NBA many are late first round selections or even second round picks. John Stockton, Mark Price, and as Gnome mentioned, Parker, Arenas, Rondo. For whatever reason point guards over the years often fall in the draft much more than they should. So you can get a good point in the middle to late first round pick - obviously you can also get a bust there too

BillS

03-31-2009, 03:55 PM

My biggest fault with Travis isn't even his defense. Is that in the halfcourt he cannot create offense. Unless you have a Kobe, Wade, Lebron, maybe even Pierce - someone at the small forward/shooting guard that can create a shot, then you need a point giuard to do it and as good as Diener is as running the fastbreak and moving the ball on offense, there are times in the halfcourt when the defense is locked in that you need your point guard to create something out of nothing and Diener isn't close to being able to do this.

I think the idea is that you should have someone else who can create, the PG is responsible for getting them the ball.

If the PG is the only one who can create, the tendency is for the PG to keep the rest of the players on the floor out of action, or to be vulnerable to being trapped and the rest of the half-court is ineffective. That is my criticism of TJ.

Keeping your play creation in multiple hands rather than focused on the primary ballhandler spreads the defense. At least, it seems that way to me.

I'd like the PG to have at least one money situation, like Jax backing down smaller PGs for instance, which is why I think Diener isn't a starting PG. However, I think your PG should not be your primary creator.

Now a perfect PG can handle the ball, has great court vision, is unselfish but can create when he has to.

Sure, we'd all love one of those.

naptownmenace

03-31-2009, 04:03 PM

To ME, TJ is more of a liability out on the floor than Travis is , with his bonehead plays, turnovers, and his Tinsley-esque ability to take over a game and cause us to lose .. if some of you people can't see that... well then I give up ... you people simply cannot be reached I guess...

Travis is alot better than the majority of you here at PD give him credit for..

I'd take Travis on MY team anyday ... ANYDAY over TJ Ford .. and I actually like TJ.. but NOT over Diener as my "POINT" guard

.
.

Diener's defense is very poor, which is the number one reason he doesn't get more playing time, IMO. TJ is a much better defender and scorer - heck he might even be a better overall shooter than Diener.

Justin Tyme

03-31-2009, 04:32 PM

What don't people realize... that we DON'T NEED OUR PG TO BE A SCORER ?!?!?!?!?!?!!

That's all great, BUT the Pacers need their PG to be able to play "D"! Diener doesn't. What good is all of the forementioned when he gives away more than he brings to the table?

Were you this enthralled with his play last year when he was starting PG for the Pacers? Obviously, O'Brien and Bird weren't or Bird wouldn't have brought in Ford and Jack. Not 1 but 2 PG's were brought in! That sends a loud and clear message to those that will only listen.

What's this Diener's 4th year? And he still can't make it past 3rd string PG on 2 different teams since college, and he won't be anything different on his next team either. He is what he is... a 3rd string PG, 11-15 player, who brings his lunch bucket to work with him everyday that is ready when there is a player injury or a player in foul trouble who has the ability to help out the team in these situations, but doesn't have the ability to take other PG's jobs away from them. It has nothing to do with the lack of favoritism of the coach. It has to do with his lack of talent and ability.

I understand your feelings about Diener, b/c I use to feel the same way about Graham. Reality finally set in, the light came on, and I saw Graham for what he is "a 10-12 bench player." I would have liked Graham to have been more, but he's not. There is no reason to think he is or ever will be. JMOAA

Trophy

03-31-2009, 05:40 PM

He's a good ball handler and doesn't commit many turnovers. I wouldn't mind getting him back next season hoping he does accept our offer to him if we make one.